Skip to main content

Reply to this post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: Judge TOOTMO Date: Feb 4, 2010 6:28pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Another Wall of Sound question

Midnight Sun:
"as a musician yourself Sam, you can no doubt appreciate "hearing what your audience hears", but also have to wonder how earsplitting it would be that close to the source night after night (?)"

I've wondered this myself.
Does anybody have an answer: How did they avoid being blown right out into the audience when the Wall got cranked up?

TOOTMO

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: dogsinapile! Date: Feb 5, 2010 2:25am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Another Wall of Sound question

I seem to remember reading somewhere (maybe the Wall of Sound Road Trips?) that Phil said playing in front of the wall was like being under water because the sound was so thick for lack of a better description.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: elbow1126 Date: Feb 5, 2010 5:21am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Another Wall of Sound question

Ha!! You are correct it was the booklet in the RT release!!

"it was simply too loud on stage. The theory had been that the music would go over their heads, but instead, said Lesh the top layers acted as a ceiling. "It felt like I was underwater with pressure most of the time.""

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Judge TOOTMO Date: Feb 5, 2010 11:12am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Another Wall of Sound question

Anybody got a scan of that booklet?

TOOTMO

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: elbow1126 Date: Feb 4, 2010 6:54pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Another Wall of Sound question

I can't remember where I read this, but i recall seeing an article that was written about the time that the Wall of Sound RT release came out that said that this was one of the drawbacks of the system. It was indeed quite loud on stage. I tried to find the article earlier today but couldn't locate it. Sorry.

Found this though:

"The Wall of Sound had 641 speakers…which required 26,400 watts of power coming from 55 600 watt McIntosh 2300 power amps—measured on stage it hit 127 decibels. A Navy jet taking off from an aircraft carrier hits 130dB.”—Dennis McNally

This post was modified by elbow1126 on 2010-02-05 02:54:23

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: midnight sun Date: Feb 4, 2010 7:43pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Another Wall of Sound question

127 db - yowser!

here's some copy/paste info from wiki;
{{{...the "safe" daily exposure amount at 85 dB A, known as an exposure action value, is 8 hours, while the "safe" exposure at 91 dB(A) is only 2 hours (National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, 1998)...115 dB, exposure to about half a minute}}}

have to wonder if the wall may have actually influenced the band into playing at lower volumes for longer periods of time (?)

or how about the band using earplugs?

also, why couldn't they put some of those speakers in front of them, they still would have had the separation between speakers and instruments that made this system what it was, although there was a fair number of speakers placed above them that must have had little effect on the band

{{{Tinnitus and hearing loss can be permanent conditions, and therefore precautionary measures are advisable. If a ringing in the ears is audible following lengthy exposure to a source of loud noise, such as a music concert or an industrial workplace, it means that lasting damage may already have occurred}}}

i've never heard me ears ringing after a GD show...unlike other bands, the sound people must have had a good handle on it

there's a list of people who suffer from tinnitus at the bottom of this article, including many musicians;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tinnitus

thanks for re-posting TOOTMO

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: LoogyHanger Date: Feb 4, 2010 8:29pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Another Wall of Sound question

SoundWaves.gif
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terminus_%28god%29

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Miss Divine Date: Feb 4, 2010 10:40pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Another Wall of Sound question

I'm sure that it was the reason why Donna had trouble reaching certain notes. Imagine having to sing with the Wall right behind you and contend with the electric, amplified instruments on stage.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: BornEasement Date: Feb 4, 2010 10:43pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Another Wall of Sound question

I think it also might help explain why they leave so much space in the music in those days. Listen to the ramble on rose from 11-11-73 and then the one from Europe 72 and one from 77. The parts seem stripped down to some degree, contributing to the milky jazziness of that era.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: elbow1126 Date: Feb 5, 2010 5:25am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Another Wall of Sound question

I don't know about reaching notes. I am not sure how much range she had/has. However I do recall reading somewhere that she could not hear herself on stage during those early years as an explanation for why she was often hitting the wrong notes or key. She was much better with the smaller JGB gigs and the post break GD, although it is my recollection that you don't listen to much post-break.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Feb 5, 2010 6:10am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: This just in:

Acoustical analyses recently declassified by the feds reveal that the CIA worked closely with the DEAD throughout the Wall of Sound era, as they were certain it had great potential as "non lethal" weapon for use in a variety of military applications. Somewhat surprisingly, they decided to drop all consideration of the actual wall, and focused most of their energy on the source of an absolutely piercing and simultaneously incapcitating errie shriek emanating from the sound system...after considerable additional research they determined that much to their surprise, the source of this "sound" was NOT some unusually high amplitude consequence of a short in the system, BUT in fact a woman standing on stage, apparently trying to sing with the band...at the time, they approached her about patenting this heretofore unknown means of such sound production, hoping that she could train an entire choral ensemble of women in uniform to produce the acoustic onslaught in wartime situations, but unfortunately quickly discerned that no other "singers" could mimic the original source...they decided that it was at least critical that this woman be prevented from falling into the wrong hands, and in an effort to reduce exposure, forced the band to take over a year off from touring until additional means could be developed to bring a close to the Cold War, and presumably, a reduction in interest in this "weapon" by the enemies of the Free World.

DEAD heads greeted this news with some relief as it finally explained a previously enigmatic period in the band's history known as the "hiatus", as well as explaining why the Wall of Sound was no longer used: the measurements provided by the CIA indicated that in fact, the woman provided 125 dB of sound energy on stage, rendering it "too loud" to play, and that the sound system itself provided trivial output by comparison, thus revealing all their efforts to generate a clean and high volume conveyance for their instruments had failed completely.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: elbow1126 Date: Feb 5, 2010 6:36am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: This just in:

hey if the day job goes the way of the dinosaurs and there is a successful coup attempt here (we will know by a change in the spotlight item from 9-19-70 to something from 1988 that there has been a change in leadership) you should consider submitting your resume to the folks at The Onion.

I do think if they had blasted some WOS PITBs and Scarlets snippets down in Panama they would have had Noriega out that compound in half the time.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Feb 5, 2010 7:07am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: This just in:

Yes, sort of pathetic looking at the length of that thing (hmmm, is that what she said?), eh? However, I think the "day job" is what inspires me to write during my self-imposed 15' breaks in a way that is completely unstructured, regardless of both spelling and short/concise sixteen words or less sentences...I know you know the feeling.

Cold over there this fine morning? We finally got some serious rain out West the past couple of weeks, and the flowers are coming up in the garden...the desert's a beautiful place this time of year.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: elbow1126 Date: Feb 5, 2010 7:18am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: This just in:

Cold, windy and wet this morning although I guess the real action will be a few hours to the north of us. I had to explain to the dogs on our walk this morning that they better take care of business in a timely fashion or they will need to hold their peace (piece? peas? pees? whatever). One of the boys has a baseball evaluation tomorrow for his new league. 45 degrees and muddy. Just as the game was intended to be played.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Feb 5, 2010 7:38am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: This just in:

That was one sport I always enjoyed, but never had the opportunity either when I was young or with my three boys (there was only one tball league season with the oldest, among the dozens and dozens of soccer, bball, and occas football leagues and coaching stints on my part). We did it nonstop with our boys from 1st thru 8th grades, usu having all three in a league fall, winter and spring...argh--what a lot of running around. I never was on top of all the rules in soccer as a coach: 2nd graders, running down the field against the "best" (no losses...in a league where you weren't supposed to keep score, BUT everyone did!?, esp the kids!) team and their Nigerian coach called my kid for "offsides" and I said "WTF? I don't even know what that is, and if they are running the same direction as the ball, can't we just be happy for that?!".

I take it the baseball situation with yours is a tad more serious, eh? Best of luck with it!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: elbow1126 Date: Feb 5, 2010 7:45am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: This just in:

Both boys have played baseball for a while. The older has been playing spring and fall for several years although he was quite disappointed that he did not make the JV HS team (he is 9th grade and while a good player I thought his chances were slim this year, he'll play rec ball and join the HS track team). The younger one has usually played soccer in the fall and baseball in the spring and summer. So its been a year around thing here as well. I have coached and managed baseball for both while for soccer I usually just went and helped out. I actually played HS soccer but never really had the desire to coach it because I sucked, didn't think I could teach it very well and watching the players form a scrum kind of like those silly electric football games they used to sell in the '70s was way too aggravating for me. Teaching baseball is kind of interesting because it is so situational and less physical reaction to the moment. Getting kids to think about where they need to throw the ball before each play has to be a good thing. Now whether we always accomplished that is another story.

For the record, my most talented athlete takes ballet, jazz and is now moved up to 2 days of gymnastics a week. I do wish I could convince her to join a team sport. I do think that overall they are important experiences.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Feb 5, 2010 10:35am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: This just in:

Oh man! This was sooo good: "...never really had the desire to coach it because I sucked (THIS SHOULD HAVE STOPPED ME!), didn't think I could teach it very well and watching the players form a scrum kind of like those silly electric football games (THAT IS PERFECT! EXACTLY WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE!!) they used to sell in the '70s was way too aggravating (TELL ME ABOUT IT!) for me."

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: elbow1126 Date: Feb 5, 2010 10:59am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: This just in:

Maybe the game had some value after all.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kEjI7_BKU9s&;feature=related

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: LoogyHanger Date: Feb 5, 2010 12:02pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: This just in:

Super Bowl Weekend >
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DUcKnUQr6AA

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Feb 5, 2010 6:37pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: This just in:

What did they actually play, I can't remember? (Noriega, I mean)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: elbow1126 Date: Feb 5, 2010 6:50pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: This just in:

All kinds of stuff according to this document. I suspect Styx was the breaking point.

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nsa/DOCUMENT/950206.htm

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Feb 6, 2010 5:33am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: This just in:

Not as bad as I'd have thought - I wonder if they might have actually encouraged him to dig in.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: DeadRed1971 Date: Feb 5, 2010 4:56pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Another Wall of Sound question

there's a list of people who suffer from tinnitus at the bottom of this article, including many musicians;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tinnitus

Did you notice Jack Straw was listed?